https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45584
--- Comment #2 from ppalka at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: ppalka
Date: Tue Aug 19 14:14:15 2014
New Revision: 214151
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=214151root=gccview=rev
Log:
2014-08-19 Patrick Palka ppa...@gcc.gnu.org
PR c/45584
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63748
--- Comment #7 from ppalka at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: ppalka
Date: Mon Nov 10 20:43:40 2014
New Revision: 217317
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=217317root=gccview=rev
Log:
2014-11-10 Patrick Palka ppa...@gcc.gnu.org
gcc/
PR
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63790
--- Comment #2 from ppalka at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: ppalka
Date: Mon Nov 17 02:01:36 2014
New Revision: 217638
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=217638root=gccview=rev
Log:
Always combine comparisons or conversions from booleans.
2014
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63986
--- Comment #5 from ppalka at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to Richard Biener from comment #3)
Ok, now already existing forwprop code gets fed with
bb 2:
_3 = a_2(D) == 0;
x_4 = (char) _3;
_7 = ~_3;
_8 = (int) _7;
MEM[(int
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64527
ppalka at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||ppalka at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64527
ppalka at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64527
--- Comment #3 from ppalka at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: ppalka
Date: Fri Apr 17 12:14:24 2015
New Revision: 222176
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=222176root=gccview=rev
Log:
Fix PR c++/64527
gcc/
PR c++/64527
* gimplify.c
Priority: P3
Component: tree-optimization
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: ppalka at gcc dot gnu.org
Target Milestone: ---
Test case:
unsigned int
my_mod (unsigned int a, unsigned int b)
{
return a % (1 b);
}
no longer gets folded to a (1
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=30044
ppalka at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
CC
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=30044
Patrick Palka ppalka at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=30044
--- Comment #6 from Patrick Palka ppalka at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: ppalka
Date: Wed Jun 24 12:10:57 2015
New Revision: 224896
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=224896root=gccview=rev
Log:
Revert fix for PR c++/30044
gcc/cp/ChangeLog
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=30044
Patrick Palka ppalka at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|RESOLVED|REOPENED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=30044
--- Comment #4 from Patrick Palka ppalka at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: ppalka
Date: Tue Jun 23 23:41:51 2015
New Revision: 224859
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=224859root=gccview=rev
Log:
[PATCH] Fix PR c++/30044
gcc/cp/ChangeLog
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c++
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: ppalka at gcc dot gnu.org
Target Milestone: ---
The following code should probably compile:
template template int class
struct A { };
template int
struct Y
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65168
Patrick Palka ppalka at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65168
--- Comment #13 from Patrick Palka ppalka at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: ppalka
Date: Sat Jun 13 16:11:15 2015
New Revision: 224455
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=224455root=gccview=rev
Log:
Emit -Waddress warnings for comparing address
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66686
Patrick Palka ppalka at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66686
--- Comment #7 from Patrick Palka ppalka at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: ppalka
Date: Wed Jul 1 01:07:35 2015
New Revision: 225220
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=225220root=gccview=rev
Log:
Fix PR c++/66686 (dependent template template
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67192
Patrick Palka ppalka at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||ppalka at gcc
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66686
--- Comment #2 from Patrick Palka ppalka at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to Martin Sebor from comment #1)
The code doesn't look valid to me: Y is not a valid template argument for
the template template parameter C.
But once struct X gets
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66686
--- Comment #3 from Patrick Palka ppalka at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to Patrick Palka from comment #2)
(In reply to Martin Sebor from comment #1)
The code doesn't look valid to me: Y is not a valid template argument for
the template
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66686
--- Comment #5 from Patrick Palka ppalka at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to Martin Sebor from comment #4)
Y takes a non-type template argument which isn't provided and can't be
deduced in the instantiation (i.e., what would the value of N
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=18969
--- Comment #5 from Patrick Palka ppalka at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: ppalka
Date: Sun Jul 26 17:04:31 2015
New Revision: 226236
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=226236root=gccview=rev
Log:
Fix PR c++/18969 (invalid return statement
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=18969
Patrick Palka ppalka at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66857
--- Comment #6 from Patrick Palka ppalka at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: ppalka
Date: Sat Jul 25 23:15:44 2015
New Revision: 226228
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=226228root=gccview=rev
Log:
Fix PR c++/66857
gcc/cp/ChangeLog:
PR c
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66850
Patrick Palka ppalka at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66850
--- Comment #5 from Patrick Palka ppalka at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Fixed.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66850
--- Comment #3 from Patrick Palka ppalka at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: ppalka
Date: Wed Jul 15 00:01:21 2015
New Revision: 225801
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=225801root=gccview=rev
Log:
Fix PR c++/66850
gcc/cp/ChangeLog:
PR c
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65186
--- Comment #13 from Patrick Palka ppalka at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: ppalka
Date: Mon Jul 13 20:35:53 2015
New Revision: 225749
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=225749root=gccview=rev
Log:
Fix PR c++/65186
gcc/cp/ChangeLog:
PR
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66857
Patrick Palka ppalka at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||ppalka at gcc
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66850
Patrick Palka ppalka at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |ppalka
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65186
--- Comment #6 from Patrick Palka ppalka at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to Paolo Carlini from comment #5)
Dup of c++/30044?
I don't think it's a duplicate but they do seem related. My patch for
c++/30044 does not fix this ICE.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65186
Patrick Palka ppalka at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65186
--- Comment #10 from Patrick Palka ppalka at gcc dot gnu.org ---
When I said that this PR is not a dup of c++/30044 I sadly failed to look at
#c1 and instead only looked at #c3. The test case in #c1 does appear to
effectively be a dup of c
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=30044
--- Comment #8 from Patrick Palka ppalka at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: ppalka
Date: Fri Jul 10 23:21:39 2015
New Revision: 225706
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=225706root=gccview=rev
Log:
Fix PR c++/30044
gcc/cp/ChangeLog:
PR c
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66850
--- Comment #2 from Patrick Palka ppalka at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Related test cases:
template typename T, template typename U, U class struct Sort;
template template typename U, U class Comparator
struct Sortint, Comparator
{
template int I
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65186
--- Comment #12 from Patrick Palka ppalka at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to Paolo Carlini from comment #11)
Hi Patrick. Opening a new bug certainly is OK, in particular in this case
where we failed to just simplify the testcase originally
: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c++
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: ppalka at gcc dot gnu.org
Target Milestone: ---
The following snippet emits an ICE in tsubst:
template template typename U, U class struct Sort
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67819
--- Comment #2 from Patrick Palka ---
(In reply to Patrick Palka from comment #1)
> Sorry if this has been discussed before, but can't you use
> linemap_location_from_macro_expansion_p to check whether the conditional
> contains a macro
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67819
Patrick Palka changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||ppalka at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67192
--- Comment #12 from Patrick Palka ---
(In reply to Manuel López-Ibáñez from comment #10)
> (In reply to Manuel López-Ibáñez from comment #8)
> > Does GCC work at all if input_location is saved and restored in
> > c_parser_peek_token? I guess
||ppalka at gcc dot gnu.org
Resolution|--- |FIXED
--- Comment #3 from Patrick Palka ---
Fixed as part of r226479.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53223
Patrick Palka changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||ppalka at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: ppalka at gcc dot gnu.org
Target Milestone: ---
In the following snippet, one would expect foo and bar to get folded to the
same code, but that is not the case.
void dummy
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68764
--- Comment #2 from Patrick Palka ---
(In reply to Marek Polacek from comment #1)
> I agree that this is weird but this is something the C FE likely shouldn't
> do.
One (possibly minor) obstacle with doing it in the middle-end is that the
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53223
Patrick Palka changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |ppalka at gcc dot
gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=24666
--- Comment #2 from Patrick Palka ---
Author: ppalka
Date: Thu Dec 17 04:01:47 2015
New Revision: 231736
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=231736=gcc=rev
Log:
Fix some blockers of PR c++/24666 (arrays decay to pointers too early)
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66895
--- Comment #1 from Patrick Palka ---
Author: ppalka
Date: Thu Dec 17 04:01:47 2015
New Revision: 231736
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=231736=gcc=rev
Log:
Fix some blockers of PR c++/24666 (arrays decay to pointers too early)
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=41426
--- Comment #2 from Patrick Palka ---
Author: ppalka
Date: Thu Dec 17 04:01:47 2015
New Revision: 231736
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=231736=gcc=rev
Log:
Fix some blockers of PR c++/24666 (arrays decay to pointers too early)
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59878
--- Comment #7 from Patrick Palka ---
Author: ppalka
Date: Thu Dec 17 04:01:47 2015
New Revision: 231736
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=231736=gcc=rev
Log:
Fix some blockers of PR c++/24666 (arrays decay to pointers too early)
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=16333
--- Comment #2 from Patrick Palka ---
Author: ppalka
Date: Thu Dec 17 04:01:47 2015
New Revision: 231736
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=231736=gcc=rev
Log:
Fix some blockers of PR c++/24666 (arrays decay to pointers too early)
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53223
--- Comment #13 from Patrick Palka ---
Author: ppalka
Date: Tue Dec 15 03:33:53 2015
New Revision: 231640
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=231640=gcc=rev
Log:
Fix PR c++/21802 (two-stage name lookup fails for operators)
gcc/cp/ChangeLog:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=21802
--- Comment #6 from Patrick Palka ---
Author: ppalka
Date: Tue Dec 15 03:33:53 2015
New Revision: 231640
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=231640=gcc=rev
Log:
Fix PR c++/21802 (two-stage name lookup fails for operators)
gcc/cp/ChangeLog:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59878
--- Comment #8 from Patrick Palka ---
Author: ppalka
Date: Thu Dec 17 13:30:04 2015
New Revision: 231755
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=231755=gcc=rev
Log:
Fix wrong PR references
PR c++/59878 -> PR c++/59879
Added:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59879
--- Comment #1 from Patrick Palka ---
Author: ppalka
Date: Thu Dec 17 13:30:04 2015
New Revision: 231755
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=231755=gcc=rev
Log:
Fix wrong PR references
PR c++/59878 -> PR c++/59879
Added:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67550
Patrick Palka changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||ppalka at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68831
Patrick Palka changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |ppalka at gcc dot
gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68948
Patrick Palka changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||ppalka at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
||2015-12-26
CC||ppalka at gcc dot gnu.org
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |ppalka at gcc dot
gnu.org
Ever confirmed|0 |1
--- Comment #1 from Patrick Palka ---
Reduced test case
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68978
Patrick Palka changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |ppalka at gcc dot
gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68978
--- Comment #3 from Patrick Palka ---
Author: ppalka
Date: Fri Dec 18 23:16:33 2015
New Revision: 231841
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=231841=gcc=rev
Log:
Fix PR c++/68978 (bogus error: lvalue required as left operand of assignment)
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68978
Patrick Palka changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68831
--- Comment #4 from Patrick Palka ---
Author: ppalka
Date: Fri Dec 18 02:25:39 2015
New Revision: 231798
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=231798=gcc=rev
Log:
Fix PR c++/68831 (superfluous -Waddress warning for C++ delete)
gcc/cp/ChangeLog:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68831
Patrick Palka changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
Priority: P3
Component: tree-optimization
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: ppalka at gcc dot gnu.org
Target Milestone: ---
On x86 the following code
void bar (int x);
void
baz (int x, bool b)
{
bar (x * b);
}
is compiled to
bar:
movzbl
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=27100
--- Comment #8 from Patrick Palka ---
Author: ppalka
Date: Fri Jun 3 20:42:08 2016
New Revision: 237078
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=237078=gcc=rev
Log:
Fix PR c++/27100
gcc/cp/ChangeLog:
PR c++/27100
* decl.c
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=27100
Patrick Palka changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65608
Bug 65608 depends on bug 27100, which changed state.
Bug 27100 Summary: ICE with multiple friend declarations
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=27100
What|Removed |Added
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70847
Patrick Palka changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||ppalka at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70847
--- Comment #11 from Patrick Palka ---
(In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #10)
> Note, the patch has been successfully bootstrapped/regtested on x86_64-linux
> and i686-linux.
>
> I don't think such shared trees should be occurring
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70847
--- Comment #14 from Patrick Palka ---
(In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #13)
> Created attachment 38638 [details]
> gcc7-pr70847.patch
>
> So, shall I test this version?
> As added bonus, if cp_fold returns for different stmts the same
at gcc dot gnu.org |ppalka at gcc dot
gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71330
Patrick Palka changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||ppalka at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71330
--- Comment #11 from Patrick Palka ---
(In reply to Patrick Palka from comment #10)
> I think the problem is with cp_fold_function() which does
>
> cp_walk_tree (_SAVED_TREE (fndecl), cp_fold_r, NULL, NULL);
>
> and cp_fold_r is itself
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70822
--- Comment #2 from Patrick Palka ---
Author: ppalka
Date: Thu May 26 18:17:43 2016
New Revision: 236792
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=236792=gcc=rev
Log:
Fix PR c++/70822 (bogus error with parenthesized SCOPE_REF)
gcc/cp/ChangeLog:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70106
--- Comment #7 from Patrick Palka ---
Author: ppalka
Date: Thu May 26 18:17:43 2016
New Revision: 236792
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=236792=gcc=rev
Log:
Fix PR c++/70822 (bogus error with parenthesized SCOPE_REF)
gcc/cp/ChangeLog:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71077
--- Comment #3 from Patrick Palka ---
Author: ppalka
Date: Wed Jun 1 02:36:27 2016
New Revision: 236973
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=236973=gcc=rev
Log:
Fix PR tree-optimization/71077
gcc/ChangeLog:
PR tree-optimization/71077
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71077
Patrick Palka changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70822
Patrick Palka changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |6.2
Summary|[6/7 Regression]
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71314
Patrick Palka changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71314
--- Comment #2 from Patrick Palka ---
Author: ppalka
Date: Wed Jun 1 02:37:50 2016
New Revision: 236974
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=236974=gcc=rev
Log:
Fix PR tree-optimization/71314
gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog:
PR
verity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: target
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: ppalka at gcc dot gnu.org
Target Milestone: ---
$ cat test.c
int test(int a) {
return a & 1 ? 7 : 3;
}
$ gcc -O2 -o- -S test.c
test:
.LFB0:
.cfi_star
||2016-05-29
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |ppalka at gcc dot
gnu.org
Ever confirmed|0 |1
--- Comment #1 from Patrick Palka ---
I suppose the test is sensitive to branching cost like ssa-thread-11.c is so it
should probably
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69029
--- Comment #3 from Patrick Palka ---
Author: ppalka
Date: Sun Jan 10 16:39:39 2016
New Revision: 232202
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=232202=gcc=rev
Log:
Fix -Wmisleading indentation false-positive for do-while statement
at gcc dot gnu.org |ppalka at gcc dot
gnu.org
--- Comment #2 from Patrick Palka ---
Thanks for the ping.
||ppalka at gcc dot gnu.org
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |ppalka at gcc dot
gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69091
--- Comment #2 from Patrick Palka ---
Author: ppalka
Date: Sat Jan 16 02:37:09 2016
New Revision: 232463
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=232463=gcc=rev
Log:
Fix PR c++/69091 (ICE with operator overload having 'auto' return type)
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68936
--- Comment #3 from Patrick Palka ---
Author: ppalka
Date: Sat Jan 16 02:27:36 2016
New Revision: 232461
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=232461=gcc=rev
Log:
Fix PR c++/68936
gcc/cp/ChangeLog:
PR c++/68936
* tree.c
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69091
Patrick Palka changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68936
Patrick Palka changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=24666
--- Comment #3 from Patrick Palka ---
Author: ppalka
Date: Tue Jan 19 00:19:16 2016
New Revision: 232547
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=232547=gcc=rev
Log:
Fix the remaining PR c++/24666 blockers (arrays decay to pointers too early)
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=11858
--- Comment #6 from Patrick Palka ---
Author: ppalka
Date: Tue Jan 19 00:19:16 2016
New Revision: 232547
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=232547=gcc=rev
Log:
Fix the remaining PR c++/24666 blockers (arrays decay to pointers too early)
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=24663
--- Comment #3 from Patrick Palka ---
Author: ppalka
Date: Tue Jan 19 00:19:16 2016
New Revision: 232547
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=232547=gcc=rev
Log:
Fix the remaining PR c++/24666 blockers (arrays decay to pointers too early)
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=24664
--- Comment #3 from Patrick Palka ---
Author: ppalka
Date: Tue Jan 19 00:19:16 2016
New Revision: 232547
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=232547=gcc=rev
Log:
Fix the remaining PR c++/24666 blockers (arrays decay to pointers too early)
at gcc dot gnu.org |ppalka at gcc dot
gnu.org
--- Comment #9 from Patrick Palka ---
(In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #7)
> (In reply to Patrick Palka from comment #6)
> > This fixes it:
>
> Are you going to post it to gcc-patches (with ChangeLog and testcase)?
It d
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69098
--- Comment #10 from Patrick Palka ---
(In reply to Patrick Palka from comment #9)
> (In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #7)
> > (In reply to Patrick Palka from comment #6)
> > > This fixes it:
> >
> > Are you going to post it to
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69098
--- Comment #11 from Patrick Palka ---
There is another bug lurking here, though. The following test case fails to
compile, even with my proposed patch:
struct A
{
template
static void *pf;
};
template
bool foo () {
return B::template
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68948
--- Comment #12 from Patrick Palka ---
Created attachment 37596
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=37596=edit
better fix for gcc 7
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68948
Patrick Palka changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
--- Comment #11 from Patrick
||ppalka at gcc dot gnu.org
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |ppalka at gcc dot
gnu.org
--- Comment #4 from Patrick Palka ---
Slightly more simplified test case:
template auto list = [](T... xs) { [=](auto f) { f(xs...); };
};
int main() { list
1 - 100 of 2893 matches
Mail list logo
